- This topic has 170 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 6 months ago by
ucodegen.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM #699921May 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM #698750
all
Participant[quote=CONCHO]I don’t own any guns and haven’t shot one in 20+ years, but I just got back from visiting Switzerland. The place is full of guns and there are little shooting houses (Stand de Tir en Français) scattered around for the people to practice at. They love ’em, can’t get enough of ’em, etc… Of course the army people have them but private people do as well. And not just hunting guns but scary looking guns like they are always telling us to be afraid of on the Tee Vee. The sort of gun you see Osama waving around with a scary soundtrack behind, you know – that kind of thing. Now consider this – the Swiss have four distinct cultures/languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansch. If there were people who historically don’t seem to get along, it would be the French, Germans, and Italians. How many wars have they fought with each other in the last couple of hundred years? Meanwhile Switzerland is an island of calm. Napoleon tried to invade it and failed. Hitler thought about it but remembered what happened to Napoleon and decided not to. And so Switzerland sits there, full of people speaking different languages, eating different foods, making jokes about and disagreeing with each other, all happily shooting their guns at targets, but not at each other. It is a strange paradox, but in that case lots of guns exist in a very peaceful society. They have had the odd mass shooting incident but those can happen anywhere – crazy people don’t care about gun laws anyway. They’re crazy!
One thing I did notice is that the Swiss have a very strong sense of responsibility and duty. I don’t think this exists here, the majority of people are just out to get what they can when they can without giving a shit about anyone else.[/quote]
It is not that simple. The military service is mandatory in Switzerland and members of militia (basically every capable male) must keep the government issued rifle and ammunition at home. Upon completing the training the militiaman has the option to keep the weapon (modified to semi-automatic).
So, all males are evaluated before conscription and those who are find capable will receive ~20 weeks of training. If you want to buy another gun you need a permit. If you want to carry your gun you need another permit. If you are an ‘auslander’ good luck getting any of that. The country generally has no areas like Logan Heights and East LA or associations like Vista Home Boys.May 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM #698843Participant[quote=CONCHO]I don’t own any guns and haven’t shot one in 20+ years, but I just got back from visiting Switzerland. The place is full of guns and there are little shooting houses (Stand de Tir en Français) scattered around for the people to practice at. They love ’em, can’t get enough of ’em, etc… Of course the army people have them but private people do as well. And not just hunting guns but scary looking guns like they are always telling us to be afraid of on the Tee Vee. The sort of gun you see Osama waving around with a scary soundtrack behind, you know – that kind of thing. Now consider this – the Swiss have four distinct cultures/languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansch. If there were people who historically don’t seem to get along, it would be the French, Germans, and Italians. How many wars have they fought with each other in the last couple of hundred years? Meanwhile Switzerland is an island of calm. Napoleon tried to invade it and failed. Hitler thought about it but remembered what happened to Napoleon and decided not to. And so Switzerland sits there, full of people speaking different languages, eating different foods, making jokes about and disagreeing with each other, all happily shooting their guns at targets, but not at each other. It is a strange paradox, but in that case lots of guns exist in a very peaceful society. They have had the odd mass shooting incident but those can happen anywhere – crazy people don’t care about gun laws anyway. They’re crazy!
One thing I did notice is that the Swiss have a very strong sense of responsibility and duty. I don’t think this exists here, the majority of people are just out to get what they can when they can without giving a shit about anyone else.[/quote]
It is not that simple. The military service is mandatory in Switzerland and members of militia (basically every capable male) must keep the government issued rifle and ammunition at home. Upon completing the training the militiaman has the option to keep the weapon (modified to semi-automatic).
So, all males are evaluated before conscription and those who are find capable will receive ~20 weeks of training. If you want to buy another gun you need a permit. If you want to carry your gun you need another permit. If you are an ‘auslander’ good luck getting any of that. The country generally has no areas like Logan Heights and East LA or associations like Vista Home Boys.May 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM #699430Participant[quote=CONCHO]I don’t own any guns and haven’t shot one in 20+ years, but I just got back from visiting Switzerland. The place is full of guns and there are little shooting houses (Stand de Tir en Français) scattered around for the people to practice at. They love ’em, can’t get enough of ’em, etc… Of course the army people have them but private people do as well. And not just hunting guns but scary looking guns like they are always telling us to be afraid of on the Tee Vee. The sort of gun you see Osama waving around with a scary soundtrack behind, you know – that kind of thing. Now consider this – the Swiss have four distinct cultures/languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansch. If there were people who historically don’t seem to get along, it would be the French, Germans, and Italians. How many wars have they fought with each other in the last couple of hundred years? Meanwhile Switzerland is an island of calm. Napoleon tried to invade it and failed. Hitler thought about it but remembered what happened to Napoleon and decided not to. And so Switzerland sits there, full of people speaking different languages, eating different foods, making jokes about and disagreeing with each other, all happily shooting their guns at targets, but not at each other. It is a strange paradox, but in that case lots of guns exist in a very peaceful society. They have had the odd mass shooting incident but those can happen anywhere – crazy people don’t care about gun laws anyway. They’re crazy!
One thing I did notice is that the Swiss have a very strong sense of responsibility and duty. I don’t think this exists here, the majority of people are just out to get what they can when they can without giving a shit about anyone else.[/quote]
It is not that simple. The military service is mandatory in Switzerland and members of militia (basically every capable male) must keep the government issued rifle and ammunition at home. Upon completing the training the militiaman has the option to keep the weapon (modified to semi-automatic).
So, all males are evaluated before conscription and those who are find capable will receive ~20 weeks of training. If you want to buy another gun you need a permit. If you want to carry your gun you need another permit. If you are an ‘auslander’ good luck getting any of that. The country generally has no areas like Logan Heights and East LA or associations like Vista Home Boys.May 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM #699578Participant[quote=CONCHO]I don’t own any guns and haven’t shot one in 20+ years, but I just got back from visiting Switzerland. The place is full of guns and there are little shooting houses (Stand de Tir en Français) scattered around for the people to practice at. They love ’em, can’t get enough of ’em, etc… Of course the army people have them but private people do as well. And not just hunting guns but scary looking guns like they are always telling us to be afraid of on the Tee Vee. The sort of gun you see Osama waving around with a scary soundtrack behind, you know – that kind of thing. Now consider this – the Swiss have four distinct cultures/languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansch. If there were people who historically don’t seem to get along, it would be the French, Germans, and Italians. How many wars have they fought with each other in the last couple of hundred years? Meanwhile Switzerland is an island of calm. Napoleon tried to invade it and failed. Hitler thought about it but remembered what happened to Napoleon and decided not to. And so Switzerland sits there, full of people speaking different languages, eating different foods, making jokes about and disagreeing with each other, all happily shooting their guns at targets, but not at each other. It is a strange paradox, but in that case lots of guns exist in a very peaceful society. They have had the odd mass shooting incident but those can happen anywhere – crazy people don’t care about gun laws anyway. They’re crazy!
One thing I did notice is that the Swiss have a very strong sense of responsibility and duty. I don’t think this exists here, the majority of people are just out to get what they can when they can without giving a shit about anyone else.[/quote]
It is not that simple. The military service is mandatory in Switzerland and members of militia (basically every capable male) must keep the government issued rifle and ammunition at home. Upon completing the training the militiaman has the option to keep the weapon (modified to semi-automatic).
So, all males are evaluated before conscription and those who are find capable will receive ~20 weeks of training. If you want to buy another gun you need a permit. If you want to carry your gun you need another permit. If you are an ‘auslander’ good luck getting any of that. The country generally has no areas like Logan Heights and East LA or associations like Vista Home Boys.May 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM #699931Participant[quote=CONCHO]I don’t own any guns and haven’t shot one in 20+ years, but I just got back from visiting Switzerland. The place is full of guns and there are little shooting houses (Stand de Tir en Français) scattered around for the people to practice at. They love ’em, can’t get enough of ’em, etc… Of course the army people have them but private people do as well. And not just hunting guns but scary looking guns like they are always telling us to be afraid of on the Tee Vee. The sort of gun you see Osama waving around with a scary soundtrack behind, you know – that kind of thing. Now consider this – the Swiss have four distinct cultures/languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansch. If there were people who historically don’t seem to get along, it would be the French, Germans, and Italians. How many wars have they fought with each other in the last couple of hundred years? Meanwhile Switzerland is an island of calm. Napoleon tried to invade it and failed. Hitler thought about it but remembered what happened to Napoleon and decided not to. And so Switzerland sits there, full of people speaking different languages, eating different foods, making jokes about and disagreeing with each other, all happily shooting their guns at targets, but not at each other. It is a strange paradox, but in that case lots of guns exist in a very peaceful society. They have had the odd mass shooting incident but those can happen anywhere – crazy people don’t care about gun laws anyway. They’re crazy!
One thing I did notice is that the Swiss have a very strong sense of responsibility and duty. I don’t think this exists here, the majority of people are just out to get what they can when they can without giving a shit about anyone else.[/quote]
It is not that simple. The military service is mandatory in Switzerland and members of militia (basically every capable male) must keep the government issued rifle and ammunition at home. Upon completing the training the militiaman has the option to keep the weapon (modified to semi-automatic).
So, all males are evaluated before conscription and those who are find capable will receive ~20 weeks of training. If you want to buy another gun you need a permit. If you want to carry your gun you need another permit. If you are an ‘auslander’ good luck getting any of that. The country generally has no areas like Logan Heights and East LA or associations like Vista Home Boys.May 25, 2011 at 5:42 PM #698770Eugene
ParticipantReading Haynes vs. U.S. more closely, I realized that it has nothing to do with the defendant being a convicted felon (I don’t think he was!). It simply observes that, given the way 26 USC was formulated in 1968, the only people who might be required to file registration forms for their firearms, with rare exceptions, were those who obtained their weapons illegally.
In principle, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not an absolute protection against providing information to the government. For example, income from selling illegal drugs in taxable and you can’t hide behind the Fifth Amendment to refuse filing taxes. (See United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259; Shapiro v. United States, 335 U. S. 1).
The decision in Haynes vs. U.S. remained relevant for about nine months, because, in October 1968, the Congress passed an amendment to the National Firearms Act, intended to cure this specific problem:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/
[quote]Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968
Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed. Indeed, under the amended law, there is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person. Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration. In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.[/quote]
May 25, 2011 at 5:42 PM #698863ParticipantReading Haynes vs. U.S. more closely, I realized that it has nothing to do with the defendant being a convicted felon (I don’t think he was!). It simply observes that, given the way 26 USC was formulated in 1968, the only people who might be required to file registration forms for their firearms, with rare exceptions, were those who obtained their weapons illegally.
In principle, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not an absolute protection against providing information to the government. For example, income from selling illegal drugs in taxable and you can’t hide behind the Fifth Amendment to refuse filing taxes. (See United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259; Shapiro v. United States, 335 U. S. 1).
The decision in Haynes vs. U.S. remained relevant for about nine months, because, in October 1968, the Congress passed an amendment to the National Firearms Act, intended to cure this specific problem:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/
[quote]Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968
Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed. Indeed, under the amended law, there is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person. Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration. In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.[/quote]
May 25, 2011 at 5:42 PM #699450ParticipantReading Haynes vs. U.S. more closely, I realized that it has nothing to do with the defendant being a convicted felon (I don’t think he was!). It simply observes that, given the way 26 USC was formulated in 1968, the only people who might be required to file registration forms for their firearms, with rare exceptions, were those who obtained their weapons illegally.
In principle, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not an absolute protection against providing information to the government. For example, income from selling illegal drugs in taxable and you can’t hide behind the Fifth Amendment to refuse filing taxes. (See United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259; Shapiro v. United States, 335 U. S. 1).
The decision in Haynes vs. U.S. remained relevant for about nine months, because, in October 1968, the Congress passed an amendment to the National Firearms Act, intended to cure this specific problem:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/
[quote]Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968
Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed. Indeed, under the amended law, there is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person. Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration. In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.[/quote]
May 25, 2011 at 5:42 PM #699598ParticipantReading Haynes vs. U.S. more closely, I realized that it has nothing to do with the defendant being a convicted felon (I don’t think he was!). It simply observes that, given the way 26 USC was formulated in 1968, the only people who might be required to file registration forms for their firearms, with rare exceptions, were those who obtained their weapons illegally.
In principle, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not an absolute protection against providing information to the government. For example, income from selling illegal drugs in taxable and you can’t hide behind the Fifth Amendment to refuse filing taxes. (See United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259; Shapiro v. United States, 335 U. S. 1).
The decision in Haynes vs. U.S. remained relevant for about nine months, because, in October 1968, the Congress passed an amendment to the National Firearms Act, intended to cure this specific problem:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/
[quote]Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968
Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed. Indeed, under the amended law, there is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person. Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration. In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.[/quote]
May 25, 2011 at 5:42 PM #699951ParticipantReading Haynes vs. U.S. more closely, I realized that it has nothing to do with the defendant being a convicted felon (I don’t think he was!). It simply observes that, given the way 26 USC was formulated in 1968, the only people who might be required to file registration forms for their firearms, with rare exceptions, were those who obtained their weapons illegally.
In principle, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not an absolute protection against providing information to the government. For example, income from selling illegal drugs in taxable and you can’t hide behind the Fifth Amendment to refuse filing taxes. (See United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259; Shapiro v. United States, 335 U. S. 1).
The decision in Haynes vs. U.S. remained relevant for about nine months, because, in October 1968, the Congress passed an amendment to the National Firearms Act, intended to cure this specific problem:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/
[quote]Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968
Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed. Indeed, under the amended law, there is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person. Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration. In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA.[/quote]
May 25, 2011 at 6:46 PM #698795Vod-Vil
ParticipantWhen my aunt was in high school she was a member of “The Marksmanship Club”.She told me she would walk to school with her rifle and put it on the shelf above the winter coats when she walked into class.No lockdowns,no police,no hysteria.
Something sinister has taken control of Modern America.
May 25, 2011 at 6:46 PM #698888ParticipantWhen my aunt was in high school she was a member of “The Marksmanship Club”.She told me she would walk to school with her rifle and put it on the shelf above the winter coats when she walked into class.No lockdowns,no police,no hysteria.
Something sinister has taken control of Modern America.
May 25, 2011 at 6:46 PM #699475ParticipantWhen my aunt was in high school she was a member of “The Marksmanship Club”.She told me she would walk to school with her rifle and put it on the shelf above the winter coats when she walked into class.No lockdowns,no police,no hysteria.
Something sinister has taken control of Modern America.
May 25, 2011 at 6:46 PM #699623ParticipantWhen my aunt was in high school she was a member of “The Marksmanship Club”.She told me she would walk to school with her rifle and put it on the shelf above the winter coats when she walked into class.No lockdowns,no police,no hysteria.
Something sinister has taken control of Modern America.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.